AMD Polaris Thread: Radeon RX 480, RX 470 & RX 460 launching June 29th

Page 181 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

AnandThenMan

Diamond Member
Nov 11, 2004
3,949
504
126
I'm curious how much 14nm of Samsung/GlobalFoundries affects power consumption of RX 480?
Wouldn't it be better for AMD if they could stick with 16nm of TSMC?
28nm AMD/Nvidia the perf/watt is greatly in Nvidia's favour so AMD on TSMC's 16nm would probably have made no difference.
 

Mercennarius

Senior member
Oct 28, 2015
466
84
91
It is of course. But at the risk of beating a dead horse AMD needed a clear win to sway the Nvidia loyalists and there are many. Right now the 480 is the best card for the money very easily but for how long? Let's say the 1060 is 90% perf/dollar 120% perf/watt (could be much higher) that is easily enough to keep the faithful who are running 960's or slower to stay with Nvidia.

Gotcha. And you're right. The NVidia loyalists will probably not budget an inch.

But this card has a strong potential to do well to the casual uninformed gamer who only cares about price and VRAM.
 

Jaydip

Diamond Member
Mar 29, 2010
3,691
21
81
APUs only. Good one. "NV PC enthusiast $1000 mid-range GPUs Masterace FTW!)

No thanks.

Kyle wasn't right at all. While RX 480 is a disappointment from a perf/watt perspective, it's an R9 380 successor, while Kyle continuously implied the card is a GTX1070/1080 competitor. You seem to have not read any of this posts. The only thing Kyle got right is AMD's awful perf/watt but nothing else.

NV can price w/e they want, they can price it even at $10000, it is completely up to me the consumer whether I will buy it or not.I chose not to buy 1080 since according to me it is not a worthwhile upgrade, waiting for 1080Ti/Vega , as a consumer you always have a choice exercise it!Just because a company can price higher doesn't necessarily mean they will leave their major computer base high and dry.I think you entirely missed my point, I don't care what it succeeds but it can't consume more power while being slower, end of story period.

Kyle said AMD had a turd on their hands, while Kyle is always a sensationalist but in a sense it is a major setback and doesn't bode well for mobile polaris unless they can fix it asap.
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,142
131
Has anyone posted this? Apparently the 4GB model uses slower (cheaper?) VRAM:

The above specifications are for the 8GB $239 version of RX 480 that we are reviewing here which uses 8GB of 8Gbps GDDR5 memory. The $199 version of RX 480 it uses 4GB of 7Gbps memory, and we have not tested it.

www.babeltechreviews.com/rx-480-reviewed-26-games/view-all


Brutal, I owned a 390 and wouldn't even want to game with that at 1080p. It wasn't awful, but I had to crank settings down to get consistent 40+ fps without dips even at 1080. And with the 480 looking close to that or even but slower, ouch.

The next step up for Radeon R9 290/390 and Geforce GTX 980/970 owners right now is either discounted Geforce GTX 980 Ti, Fury non-X/X or Geforce GTX 1080/1070.

People that were comparing the 480 to the 1070 look awfully silly right now, as expected. Yes it's cheaper...but that's grasping at straws. The 1070 uses only 150w so the power discussion is kind moot, and it's worlds faster than the 480.

Indeed. People need to accept that AMD is not a charity. If there was any chance of Geforce GTX 1070 performance here, it would not be priced below $299-349.
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,056
409
126
the card is well within reach for the rumored 1060 in terms of performance, with the potential to use a huge amount less power (like probably sub 100W TDP, considering the GP104 huge efficiency lead over everything else), still I can't feel to disappointing, you have to look at where AMD was until, it's a solid improvement, compare the efficiency to the 380 and 390.... more or less 970 perf (+ no vram issues and better DX12) for 970 power draw for $200.

now if Nvidia decides to go aggressive with the 1060 pricing... well...

good thing is, the 970 was $329, the 1070 $399 (+ founders edition), if they follow this with the 1060... the 960 was $200, 1060 = ??
 

Tumaras

Member
May 23, 2016
29
0
0
To boot, 480 is only getting 21-22 MH/s in mining tests, which was the other thing people were excited about it for. That's slower than the midrange Hawaii cards and WAY slower than the 390. More reason to be glad if you didn't wait.
 

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,208
1,580
136
In my mind RX 480 at 110-130W would only be trading blows with R9 390/390X. My issue on this one is that it's taking them a 163-167W chip to do so, far worse than I predicted. I had no problem with RX 480 ~ R9 390 but not at nearly 170W power usage. That's a fail to me when considering AMD is using both a newer GCN architecture and a 14nm node shrink at the same time.

:thumbsup:

Exactly. Performance/$ is as excepted and worse than 290/290x deals were over 1 year ago. But those deals had insane value.

The issue here is power use and that the reference is running at it's limits. If you can barley match your competitors 2 year old card on a new node on performance/watt, you failed. The only unknown is the process. I really hope Vega is on TSMC. Would make sense as it's low volume anyway and not very relevant for the WSA.

And what I don't get why AMD marketing failed once more. It's not even close to 2x performance/watt, let alone 2.5x. Even in the best case scenario it's not.

Regardless of these issues card can still be a success at this price point. I'm more concerned about the next tier level and pricing if Vega also has such terrible performance/watt. Prices will remain high. Also there is now a huge gap between the 1070 and RX 480 in price and performance.
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,142
131
Curiously the card does worse relative to Hawaii in DX12:

RX-480-ABC-92.jpg


RX-480-ABC-93.jpg


www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardw...9-radeon-rx480-8gb-performance-review-24.html

It was all around slower than a Radeon R9 390 in the Hardware Canucks review.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,635
3,095
136
Perhaps you have too high hopes for new generations ? It looks to me this way. I mean i think 1080 1070 and 480 is all fast lol.

As an advice you might want to lower your 1060 non ti expectations a bit already now.

Or perhaps you are saving for the big sandals? :)

Nothing but leather and bronze, baby. Leather and bronze.

Yea I feel the same but you know what my card is old and needs replaced so I'm going to get one anyway when AIB models come out.

Well, the 480 will still get the job done at a good price. Some of us were hoping for more simply for the health of PC gaming, even if we didn't want the card for ourselves. Coming from a 7970 I think $250 for a 480 would be a happy purchase. You may consider waiting a very short time to see what the 1060 has to offer, but as you may expect the price could be higher than a 480. It can't be much higher though, but it can be priced high enough to make it not worth it over a 480. We'll know shortly.
 

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
the card is well within reach for the rumored 1060 in terms of performance, with the potential to use a huge amount less power (like probably sub 100W TDP, considering the GP104 huge efficiency lead over everything else), still I can't feel to disappointing, you have to look at where AMD was until, it's a solid improvement, compare the efficiency to the 380 and 390.... more or less 970 perf (+ no vram issues and better DX12) for 970 power draw for $200.

now if Nvidia decides to go aggressive with the 1060 pricing... well...

good thing is, the 970 was $329, the 1070 $399 (+ founders edition), if they follow this with the 1060... the 960 was $200, 1060 = ??

$250 for the 1060 4GB @ GTX 970 levels and almost everybody will more than happily pay that premium through perf/W over the $200-230 reference 480s. And this time, there will be no firesale 290s/390s to save AMD's hide.
 

paladiin

Member
Oct 23, 2001
181
0
0
I'm a budget gamer who in the past has always bought midrange "bang for your buck" video cards. My budget is usually $150, which is what I paid for my Radeon 6850 a whopping 6 years ago. Its been a workhorse but my socket 939 rig is starting to show its age. I've spend $20 for an E5450 quad core and have 6GB DDR2 and this thing still has legs. I game at 1080p and have had to drop visual quality to keep playing so its time for an upgrade.

Until now, there hasn't been any decent budget card that is worth paying $150 for that would significantly impact my gaming experience. Best I could have done is a 950 in that price range which was solid but not quite the "double performance" that I usually wait for to upgrade. The RX480 is certainly looking solid though with performance right there with a 970. Not everyone buys bleeding edge tech. From the benches I've seen, this card hits the sweet spot for price/performance and future proofing. Its not going to beat a 1070 but gamers like me aren't looking for a $400 card. Sub $200 and I think the 8GB version would be an incredible value for folks coming from older cards like 750Ti or older. Maybe in a few months it'll be at that point. If they launched the 4GB version at $149 there would be no disputing its price/performance. Lets see how quick it gets there.

Though still laugh at everyone with their 1070's and 1080's and 980's getting their feather's ruffled at this launch. Sure AMD overhyped the launch but from the day 1 benches on early drivers, its clear to see this card is gonna be a budget gamer's dream, not a high end card. Can't wait to see what the 1060 looks like so we can have a real battle of the budgets!
 

lixlax

Member
Nov 6, 2014
183
150
116
Seems that RX480 is clocked above the efficiency sweetspot again and that also tells something about Samsung/GF's 14nm vs TSMC's 16nm. I know that Nvidias Maxwell already clocked higher on the same node vs GCN, but currently Pascal is almost 50% in front of AMD on clocks- has there ever been such a disparity?
 

agfkfhahddhdn

Senior member
Dec 14, 2003
318
2
81
It is of course. But at the risk of beating a dead horse AMD needed a clear win to sway the Nvidia loyalists and there are many. Right now the 480 is the best card for the money very easily but for how long? Let's say the 1060 is 90% perf/dollar 120% perf/watt (could be much higher) that is easily enough to keep the faithful who are running 960's or slower to stay with Nvidia.

This card was never meant to sway Nvidia loyalists. Nvidia loyalists are people who do not listen to logic or reason. Nvidia loyalists are people who still maintain they'd spend a $200 premium to avoid AMD driver issues that were resolved years ago. This card is meant to attack the mid-range market, regain market share, and return to profitability. They will probably be successful in that regard because the issues we are seeing - high power usage, no OC headroom - are of no relevance to mid-range consumers. Nor are pissy fanboy battles. And I would have to expect that the cheap reference cooler is simply a way to increase the margins on these cards. They're going to sell a lot of these cards to people who will never in their life consider or even notice the very real downsides of the card.

And please don't try to claim I'm an AMD fanboy because I currently have a Radeon, my 1070 is in the mail.
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,142
131
Reviews added to first post!
Will add a lot more later tonight.


This could be a problem for some cheaper/older motherboards:

The RX 480 reference board comes with a single 6-pin power input, which combined with power from the PCIe slot is specified up to 150 W power draw. The RX 480 however consistently exceeds that, reaching 163-166 watts in our tests. While this is a non-issue for most power supplies and motherboards, there are some (very few) out there that will run into problems providing over-the-spec power for extended periods of time. I think AMD should have rather opted for an 8-pin power input instead of the 6-pin. This would also have allowed them to go for a higher board power limit which would have resulted in better performance.

Card runs into temperature and power limit, resulting in reduced clocks
Power draw exceeds PCI-Express specification

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/29.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
I'm a budget gamer who in the past has always bought midrange "bang for your buck" video cards. My budget is usually $150, which is what I paid for my Radeon 6850 a whopping 6 years ago. Its been a workhorse but my socket 939 rig is starting to show its age. I've spend $20 for an E5450 quad core and have 6GB DDR2 and this thing still has legs. I game at 1080p and have had to drop visual quality to keep playing so its time for an upgrade.

Until now, there hasn't been any decent budget card that is worth paying $150 for that would significantly impact my gaming experience. Best I could have done is a 950 in that price range which was solid but not quite the "double performance" that I usually wait for to upgrade. The RX480 is certainly looking solid though with performance right there with a 970. Not everyone buys bleeding edge tech. From the benches I've seen, this card hits the sweet spot for price/performance and future proofing. Its not going to beat a 1070 but gamers like me aren't looking for a $400 card. Sub $200 and I think the 8GB version would be an incredible value for folks coming from older cards like 750Ti or older. Maybe in a few months it'll be at that point. If they launched the 4GB version at $149 there would be no disputing its price/performance. Lets see how quick it gets there.

Though still laugh at everyone with their 1070's and 1080's and 980's getting their feather's ruffled at this launch. Sure AMD overhyped the launch but from the day 1 benches on early drivers, its clear to see this card is gonna be a budget gamer's dream, not a high end card. Can't wait to see what the 1060 looks like so we can have a real battle of the budgets!

Except the 480 only has a uncontested window against NV perhaps as small as a week, and they botched the reference cooler and perf/W badly enough that anybody looking for their magic $200 card would be wise to wait and see for the 1060.
 

Zstream

Diamond Member
Oct 24, 2005
3,396
277
136
Since when is being the best bang for the buck not relevant?



People are stupid. Like paying a 10000$ plus premium for a Prius while needing to drive the damn thing over 150k miles to get anywhere close to a return on investment.

I think the card is great, and will recommend it to anyone around $200-50. For people complaining, they are either Nvidia users who have an allegiance (never understood that) or people whom expected a Ferrari at Honda prices.

I make a pretty good salary, and feel that I'm an enthusiast for pc gaming. I will not, and am not a person that spends money on $400 cards to only dispose of them two years later. I feel I'm in the minority on these forums, but every single one of my friends have purchased a 960 or 280 due to the price.

Price for performance remains supreme and should be for all enthusiast. For those that want a Ferrari, go and buy it, but please stop with the crap about the best card for your money in many years.
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,142
131
That not surprising given the 4 vs 8 ace. The same goes for mining.
But the card is 27% faster than 970 in dx12.

It can make up for most of that gap with its huge OCing potential, while matching/beating Radeon RX 480 in DX11 titles as long as VRAM is not a limitation. I'd still wait for 6GB GP106 instead of buying 3.5GB GM204 now though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick
Status
Not open for further replies.